When are the "cheerleaders getting dressed" videos going to leak? You know someone was making them...

I didn't know you were into that. I'll borrow my mom's car after this hot pocket and go by salvation army today to get a cheerleader outfit and e-mail the video to you. Not sure what the odds are that they'll have a 3xl cheerleader skirt though...

Because it was done on a computer. thus laws from the normal world don't apply.

Now that a judge has sided with the rest of the world that uses it's brains to choose right and wrong, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a class action lawsuit pops in. I dare say that many onlookers and also people involved would have been looking at this as a litmus test to see what the judicial reaction is. The judicial system has clearly said "This is a no-no!". As far as I can see, this is a green light for the "Well, you did wrong, now make it right with a bundle of cash" for those with the laptops etc.

* Side note: Stop putting half a sentence in the damned heading and finish it in the body. It's bloody annoying to quote.

this sounds like a conspiracy to deprive families (not just the students, although that would be bad enough) of their right to privacy. Seriously, someone should go to jail for a stunt like this.
Also it strikes me as more than a little perverted.

Which is actually a good idea, because laptops do not belong in high school.

I agree that computers can be misused in school, just as any other tool can be misused in almost any setting.

But saying "laptops are useless in high school" sounds a lot like someone 50 years older saying "ball-point pens are useless in high school".

Do you have any evidence to suggest that computers are exceedingly difficult to use in a way the benefits high school education (but for some reason do not want to share that evidence)? Are you suggesting that you've done a cost/benefit analysis and decided that

But saying "laptops are useless in high school" sounds a lot like someone 50 years older saying "ball-point pens are useless in high school".

Try a nice fountain pen one day, and you will understand. Most ballpoint pens are good only for occasional writing. This problem is somewhat solved today with ink or gel ballpoint pens, but the original pens that used thick paste were a painful disaster to anyone who writes more than a few lines per day (due to the pressure they required to spin the ball.)

Computer labs were once 'enough' when computers had a marginal role in business and society (and were many times more expensive than now), but computers now occupy a primary role in both business and personal life. It is only natural that this be extended into the classroom so that students can adjust themselves to functioning productively with them, even in spite of them, because that is what they are likely, depending on career, to have to face for the rest of their professional lives.

Your attempt to link increased exposure to computers in schools as causal to the effect of this exceptionally ill conceived institutionalized voyeurism carries no water. The problem was only that these were computers issued by the state for the purposes of the state, which, shockingly (that's sarcasm), turned out to be directly opposed to the best interests of those to which they were issued. If these had been private laptops, as happens in many schools already, the problem, even the temptation of the problem would be so remote and infeasible as to be nearly impossible.

Your appeal to 'common-sense' might have been reasonable once, long ago in the dim before-time when computers cost thousands of dollars each, but now they are cheap commodities. Some kids go to high school with shoes that cost more than a serviceable laptop.

You lastly make the argument that you would have personally enjoyed a computer because it would have enabled you to fully express your personal deficiency of character. That is tragic for you perhaps, but I brought a laptop to high school (now almost a decade ago, sad to say), maintained a 4.0 GPA, graduated with honors, etc. Don't blame the tool for the person that you may be and how you might use that tool. That's like blaming guns for murder while ignoring the times that they have been used to save the lives of others being assaulted. The tool is only as good or evil as the one who wields it.

[quote]All its theft-recovery software relies on a different model than the former LANRev, said Midgley. "We give no theft recovery tools to our [LoJack and Computrace] customers," he said. "The only truly proven model is a managed service model."[/quote]

Translation: We don't want you spying on students, we want you to pay us to do it for you!!!

Translation: We don't want you spying on students, we want you to pay us to do it for you!!!

Absolute is de-activating the cameras:

Calling LANRev a "legacy" product, Midgley also said that Absolute would ship an update in the next several weeks that will permanently disable Theft Track, the name of the feature that lets administrators switch on a laptop's camera to take photographs of a potential thief after the computer is reported stolen. "It really doesn't serve any purpose," said Midgley of Theft Trac

It's bad enough that overzealous law systems stop school from doing their job, but now it looks like schools feel they have the right to invade students privacy (perhaps to save face on a possible lawsuit??)... ah the irony of an institution that teaches the constitution and doesn't feel bound by it. No matter how "good" the intentions of the school, this should NEVER be allowed.

That establishes the context -- the photo was taken in the student's home. As for how it came to be in the school's hands, I see two options: either the student provided the photo himself or the school snapped the photo. If the student provided the photo himself, then what lawyer would even consider filing a class-action lawsuit? Furthermore, this article [computerworld.com] states, "On Friday, Christopher McGinley, the superintendent of Lower Merion, sent another letter to district parents, acknowledging that the district had turned on laptop cameras 42 times thus far in the 2009-2010 school year." However, even if the school district never turned on the camera in a single student's laptop, they still deserve to be run through the wringer:

And the privacy of non-students has been violated, the Robbins said. "By virtue of the fact that the Webcam can be remotely activated at any time by the School District, the Webcam will capture anything happening in the room in which the laptop computer is located, regardless of whether the student is sitting at the computer and using it," the lawsuit charged.

Sorry, your "fixed that for you" is dead wrong. The evidence at this point strongly supports that the school district f****d up and is now (rightly) being called on the carpet for it.

What I mean is this attitude with schools has been around for a long time. We had the vice principal sneaking around while classes were in session because he wanted to personally do locker checks and that was 20 years ago. He definitely didn't consider your locker personal space. What's worse is my school wasn't even one that had trouble, just a completely boring suburb school in a boring town. (How bad was he looking for anything? I got detention from one of those trips because he claimed I didn't push my

Right, I understand that. But you can see how if lockers are the schools property and they can do shit like that it probably didn't take much rationalization for a school official to think "Well the laptop is school property so there's no expectation of privacy if you use it." (Yeah, I admit literal spying is way overboard but on the other hand I had personal experience of a school official literally looking for excuses to give people detention because he was a dick so I'm not really surprised.)

I'm almost a little surprised that the school wasn't being penalized for this beyond the "Don't turn on the cameras, teehee~" I'm seeing here.

The concept of the technology makes sense -- get a visual of a thief using the stolen laptop. I'm okay with that. Wipe the Hard Drive on behalf of the customer's request if the unit is stolen and has information on it that shouldn't get out? Cool with me -- that's a feature people were able to buy on Dell's business laptops (Computrace, that is, with remote

The student did not report the laptop as stolen, so there's no feasible reason to be turning on the camera.The school did not give birth to the student. There is no reason to monitor the student like a parent should.

I'm happy to see that the hammer is starting to fall in favor of students using these units, but will the hammer hit the nail on the head?

(Of note, I read the main article, but behind the corp walls of fire, I can't read some of the supporting articles and information.)

We don't actually know for sure whether the school did anything wrong. There's a hell of a lot of speculation in the complaint, and this is just a preliminary ruling.

Fact is, it doesn't make sense for the school to be spying on anyone. That's 1200 students to spy on in the hope that they might catch one of them doing something naughty. Why would the school do this?

There are all sorts of ways that the school could have got the photo through reasonably legitimate means. The suit alleges and speculate

As aa parent, I can say that no matter how my child's school comes across pictures, they have NO BUSINESS what my child does off of their property unless *I* ask for their involvment. The exception would be if my kid is getting in trouble for bringing in inappropriate pictures to school.
I don't care what they thought they saw this kid doing, theirrights stop with informing the parents.

Even that's not an exception. If they brought the inappropriate pictures to school, then it is on school property and thus their business. If the student is looking at the photos in his room, at a friend's house or even has a hidden stash a block away from the school, it isn't the school's business at all.

If his grades were suffering because of looking at inappropriate pictures (or drugs or whatever), then the proper response is for the teacher to call for a meeting with the parents, not for the school administrators to require secretive spy cameras to make sure students aren't doing anything deemed inappropriate.

No, the school has no business with what your child does off of school property regardless of whether or not you want the school to play babysitter. Be a parent dammit.

The school's right to inform parents also only applies to what occurs on school property. The only exception would be things like school sponsored trips, where the school is still the guardian. In your own home, their is never a reason for the school to have access.

That's 1200 students to spy on in the hope that they might catch one of them doing something naughty. Why would the school do this?

It wasn't a 'school' that did this, it was a person, or a small group of persons. And it's been shown time and time again that people who do things like this operate under one [or more] of several [nonexclusive] motives, including 1) presumption of guilt, 2) prurience, and 3) presumption of authority or privilege.

In other words, they were expecting to find something, that's why they did it. What specifically they expected is probably a function of whatever specific hangups the persons in authority possess

We don't actually know for sure whether the school did anything wrong.

We're pretty sure they did, if we take at face value the statements of the district administrators.

Assuming the only activations were in the case of laptops being misplaced or stolen. as claimed publicly by the District, by pursuing it themselves rather than turning it over to the police department, they were acting as private investigators.

Pennsylvania, like most states, requires licenses for PIs. I strongly doubt the persons activating the cameras were so licensed.

That's the most generous reading of events I can come up with at this point.

That's hardly a fact, and in any case things don't have to "make sense" to you for them to be true. Perhaps the people you're looking at are acting irrationally? Perhaps the problem is your own inability to think of that which to others is a plausible motive?

That's 1200 students to spy on in the hope that they might catch one of them doing something naughty.

Who says they're spying on all 1200 students? Ask any maker of mass produced goods

I really cannot see any technically feasible way that the school could be punishing a student for inappropriate behavior at home, while providing a photograph as evidence, without having been spying on them. Those are the most basic facts that have been presented thus far in this case and unless something therein proves to be inaccurate, there was absolutely some sort of illegal spying going on.

That should have read:(Computrace, that is, with remote data deletion. It worked by allowing the computer to receive commands remotely once it hits the internet anywhere long enough to do its job. A delete job can be sent to the unit, wiping the drive. It was designed to survive some hardware replacements, as well, so swapping out the HDD isn't enough. At the time I did my research, there was a TSR that would regenerate itself on any Windows OS if the entire hardware batch wasn't swapped,

I'm almost a little surprised that the school wasn't being penalized for this beyond the "Don't turn on the cameras".

This is just a preliminary injunction. The big legal hammer is being assembled and raised into hammering position. The school district is now in the very uncomfortable position of having the FBI, the Justice Department, and the ACLU all against them. Both Fox News and NPR are against them.

The school did not give birth to the student. There is no reason to monitor the student like a parent should.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that this behavior would be completely unacceptable and almost certainly illegal even if the parents were doing it -- nobody is allowed to take naked pictures of a 14 year old (not even the 14 year old!) and avoid federal, pound me in the ass prison.

Maybe that's because money isn't (and never has been) the problem. Maybe it's got something to do with the fact that teachers' unions fight to ensure that there are no consequences for failure for either the school as a whole or individual teachers. Maybe it all students had a voucher of $n of state funding so their parents could choose which school their child attends from the long list of local public, private, and charter schools, there would be a reason for public schools to actually work toward providing a decent education.

The formula they've been trained on for decades is that the worse you do, the more funding you get. It's not a big mystery why they haven't improved.

I'm a long-time Slashdot user (5-digit uid!) posting anonymous for obvious reasons: you can't say this stuff and attach your name to it. Also, I'm not trolling: if you'd like to disagree, point out why.

Have you considered that the problem might be that some schools have less talented students?

I know it's not politically correct to say this, but inner-city schools are predominantly full of minority children, and suburban schools are full of white ones. When you control for different demographics, the differences in performance between the two systems largely disappear. The theory that inner city schools simply have more children who are genetically predisposed to poor grades, poor attention, and poor behavior is the one that fits the data best. The idea that all children can excel is a fallacy. Really, people are born with a wide range of different talents, and some are simply not built to shine academically. We should just accept that fact and make the best of it. Disparity of outcome is not necessarily indicative of a disparity in opportunity: if we accept hereditary variations in ability, we explain a lot.

You're probably thinking I'm some kind of bigoted skinhead, but nothing could be further from the truth. All people should be alike in dignity. Does the man with an IQ of 80 who gets up at six every morning to work in a factory deserve any less respect than I, a software developer, do? If anything, he works harder. How about soldiers, or construction laborers, or dockworkers, or any of other essential professions that do not require education and intelligence? They deserve respect too.

But they don't receive that respect. The problem is that we've economically structured our society so that it is increasingly difficult to lead a dignified life without an exceptional mind. With the sole remaining path to dignity being intellectual pursuits, it's no wonder that schools benchmark themselves on the academic performance of their students. When we combine that trend with the tragically incorrect belief that all people are born with equal talents, we get to our current system of pumping ever-more money into "failing" schools and trying to force them one way or another into producing brilliant pupils. Of course that doesn't happen, which leads to a sense of shame, further "failing" grades, movement out of the city into the suburbs, and so on. You can't squeeze blood from a stone, and sometimes you have to realize that a stone is good too.

So what would be my positive program to remedy the situation?

Consolidate all school districts: suburban "good" schools are a self-reinforcing phenomenon. If we accept the heritability of intelligence, then parents who have the money to move to one of these districts are on average more intelligent and have more intelligent children, which boosts the performance ratings of the suburban "good" schools. That in turn attracts more intelligent parents in a cycle of gentrification. Consolidating school districts over a wide geographic areas eliminates this demographic distortion, and as a side effect, would allow now-larger districts to take advantage of massive economies of scale.

Track students aggressively: within the now-larger districts, set up gifted and special needs schools and direct students to the appropriate program based on test results. That's the fairest way to ensure that everyone can develop on the way that best suits him. It's a lot more equitable than the system we have today: a genius born in the south side of Chicago will probably never use that talent, which is a tragedy for both him and society.

Provide dignified non-intellectual jobs: this point plays into larger socioeconomic econohistorical factors, but there is no reason that the wealthiest nation on earth cannot find dignified positions for people of normal intellectual means. We need to restore domestic manufacturing, extraction, and construction industries for many reasons, not least of which is to give people who aren't built for a university a chance to lead a dignified life. When these positions are available, the pressure to attend college at all costs will be greatly ameliorated.

Maybe that's because money isn't (and never has been) the problem. Maybe it's got something to do with the fact that teachers' unions fight to ensure that there are no consequences for failure for either the school as a whole or individual teachers. Maybe it all students had a voucher of $n of state funding so their parents could choose which school their child attends from the long list of local public, private, and charter schools, there would be a reason for public schools to actually work toward providing a decent education.

1. Private and charter schools don't have to accept the the challenged, disruptive, underperforming, or stupid students.Which means it really isn't so simple as "blame the teachers' union!!1"

2. If money isn't an issue, why do so many teachers spend their own cash on supplies for the classroom?Here's one article [vvdailypress.com] which cites two studies. If you care to read more, google it.

This may come as a shock to you but not all public school systems are funded equally. The higher the property values, the greater the amount of tax money. Some people try to sneak their kids into these over-funded districts by claiming that they live in the district. So while the povs go to overcrowded, nearly asbestos-free schools with leaky pipes, kids in rich districts get free MacBooks.

As with most things in life, the Simpsons did it. My Tivo even picked up that episode recently.

My son's school definitely couldn't afford that. In fact, my son's school district is talking about cutting the art/music programs and closing two schools. Including the school my son is in which happens to be one of the highest performing school in the district. Of course, the fact that the superintendent is a temporary one who won't be around to deal with the fallout has *nothing* to do about it. (No, I'm not bitter.)

Normally, when I come across stories like this, I figure that there are two sides to the story, that the school or business didn't really behave as ridiculously as the accuser is describing. There's usually a certain amount of sensationalism to such stories.

But in this case... the school really seems to be as stupid and as criminal as they first seemed, or MORE so. Every new piece of evidence is making it seem more and more like not only a screw-up, but that there should be some mass firings, if not jail time.

But in this case... the school really seems to be as stupid and as criminal as they first seemed, or MORE so. Every new piece of evidence is making it seem more and more like not only a screw-up, but that there should be some mass firings, if not jail time.

Given that there hasn't been a new piece of significant evidence come out since the release of the text of the lawsuit - hell, we haven't seen any evidence but the text of the lawsuit - that's an amazing claim.I think you are confusing press relea

"...school district employees, including the superintendent, Christopher McGinley,... making 'loud speaker announcements to all students allegedly commenting on the litigation, making false and untrue accusations [and] disparaging the Plaintiffs.'"

Who doesn't understand that once the lawyers get involved, you shut the Hell up? What is wrong with these people?

Some did. As the comment above explains, some even asked the school what's going on, and the school replied (lied, as it seems) that it's nothing to see here, move along.

2. Why didn't they cover the camera with a little electrical tape?

Some did. Majority, though, didn't - in part because they never noticed the light and in part because they were assured by the school that there is nothing to worry about.

It would be perfectly reasonable for a long-time/. reader, to smell the rat. But it is just as reasonable for a school student who is not a geek to not realize what may be happening. The students were also required to accept and use those laptops, and many would be rightfully afraid that any attempt to mess with them would result in expulsion, execution on the spot, or worse.

So, the government turned on cameras that made their way into Citizen's homes without a warrent? Hmm. Also, the administrators: "We didn't do it! Must have been IT." That doesn't fly, the school is an indivisible entity, I don't care if the janitor did it: the school is responsible.

The school district certainly is the government. The story is about a public school district, which is part of the state government. It is funded by the state and its employees are government employees. It is legally a government entity for purposes such as constitutional litigation. If what you meant was that the school district is not a law enforcement agency, that's true, but concerns about invasion of privacy and improper search by the government are not limited to law enforcement agencies.

I am absolutely shocked and appalled at the manner this software was deployed implemented and used. Fortunately the FBI and courts are involved and this matter will be put to rest quickly and justly.

That said, I think it's important that there be a metered and purposeful response to this problem. I fear that the parents of children going to this school district will seek some sort of civil damages for what occurred in this school district. That's probably the worst thing that could happen because where does that money come from? The school district, and that will cause irreparable harm to other programs at the school.

I hope that the parents and other involved parties realize that a civil judgment against the school district awarding significant damages will not help anyone. I think most of the administrative staff at the school should lose their jobs and be replaced, but to see this go to the point where lawyers are making tens of thousands in pursuit of a civil reward is unjust as well. It does the school district and students no good when the goal is to cease the activity and create a better school district.

I fear that the parents of children going to this school district will seek some sort of civil damages for what occurred in this school district. That's probably the worst thing that could happen because where does that money come from? The school district, and that will cause irreparable harm to other programs at the school

The stryde.hax writeup is enlightening and also terrifying. My initial theory, that this was all a scheme cooked up by a perverted IT "professional" in order to acquire a rich, on-demand source of child porn, is looking a lot more likely. If true, the IT admin, school board, and any administrators who approved the use of the technology should be tried under RICO statutes for conspiring to produce child pornography. These people should be imprisoned for life.

...I don't quite get; isn't it conceivable to these Penn. school admins that kids eat candy, and that a lot of candy is the same approximate size and shape as many pills? How in the world did that particular school admin make the immediate leap to dealing drugs from a video of a student eating candy while using the notebook? Is this particular "scholar" so out of touch that he had no way to imagine the kid was eating candy? Like "I would never eat while using school equipment, so obviously that student is using drugs, and from there he's obviously dealing"? It boggles my mind that these people, who are supposed to be intelligent, would embark on a so completely unconstitutional (public school == county agency, and the Constitution blankets any such agency in all American jurisdictions) procedure, and then top it off by using this illegally obtained evidence to accuse a student (who has now gone from "student" to "victim") of dealing drugs. I mean, you have to really be off your rocker to believe this chain of stupidity would make sense to any sane judge.

I'm guessing there was some problem with drugs, or truancy, or something in this school system and a new teacher or young, idiot admin fresh out of liberal arts school with a goal to fight problems in public schools but completely ignorant of the law (but spent many hours playing video games in high school; Ms. Pac Man all time winnah) thought this might be a good idea. Its the only way I can make sense of the story...

If I was Apple, I would also sue the school. Apparently the school created the impression that the camera light flickering on was some wide-spread glitch with the iSight cameras on the notebook computers.

I don't care what the school tells you, these people were spying on you. Perbix is obviously a voyeur who got off on being able to do this, and with students posting about how they were FORCED to use these laptops and how any attempt to disable the software could result in expulsion - I would NOT trust that school district, because the only reason this is coming out is because they got caught.

I would tape the cam lens, and if anyone said anything about it, you would know that the the cam had been actived at a time when the laptop HAD NOT been reported stolen.

I saw a film when I was about 6. Don't remember the name now, but it was about a boy who was possibly a military project, who escapes and steals a fighter plane.He sticks his chewing gum over the lens of the cockpit camera.

Wow look what happened, the school got in trouble. Here's how you figure out if the software is installed, on Windows just look in the registry with regedit, on Mac just use the terminal, if you can't do either because you don't know how then log off facebook and get some real skills that will serve you in life.

I realize this is Slashdot, but RTFA or STFU before you log off MySpace and attempt to get modded 'insightful' here.

Admins disabled the terminal. Students are disciplined severely for jail-breaking the laptop. None of the laptops ran Windows. What's your next tech comment, Senator Stevens?

Anyhow, the thing that surprised my prof- a computer ethics professor (might be getting a bit specific here. oh well!) - is that his granddaughter was completely in defense of it an ("I'm not doing anything wrong, so I have nothing to worry about"). I was completely flabbergasted when I first read about this. I can't believe the students aren't up in arms.

And that is exactly what is wrong with our Kids today. They don't get it and don't care about it until it bites them in the ass. By that time, it's to late to correct and so they'll simply keep givingtheir right to privacy and Habeas Corpus Away to any and everyone who wants it.

I guess it's time to reinstitute slavery and give these idiots a chance to experience exactly what the American Civil War was all about.